About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
who knows how to get us out of afghanistan and iraq. >> the republicans we have on the show say they are open to the loophole cuts. are they? >> tom coburn is. he provides a lot of cover. >> i was wondering what mike was quoting. how many pages can you get read in the seventh inning stretch? >> it's in between innings. it's the entire game. >> the tough thing for president obama, he's going to say he will extend the deadline, if it looks like a deal is coming together. this, to me, is the difficult part. if all he had to deal with was the senate, i have no doubt in the next week you would have a deal that would work. the house is difficult. he's going to need to know from nancy pelosi and john boehner the votes are in place. today, not even close to that. >> you will lose 100, maybe 120 republicans right out. if you get most of the democratic caucus and boehner pulls in 100 republicans, it gets done. it's up to the democrats. i think boehner can get 100 republicans. can pelosi get 120 democrats? >> right. okay. we are going to get to bill karins on the heat in a minute. before w
be the most egregious example to date of widespread corruption in afghanistan. american taxpayer money, hundreds of millions of dollars, ending up in the hands of the taliban. a year-long u.s. military task force discovered that the money was siphoned from a $2 billion transportation contract to provide most of the supplies to american troops. a source with knowledge of the investigation has briefed cnn about how it all went down. we are joined now from the afghan capital, kabul. just tell us briefly, how did this happen? >> reporter: this is coming from an internal report, but basically what happened was trucking companies subcontracted out to local entities here, who then in turn subcontracted out to even more local providers. what happened was it turns out that some of those local, more local firms actually had some ties to nefarious elements, including the taliban. what we see here is a bulk of the transportation costs being filtered through some of these trucking companies and part of that money is actually ending up in the hands of the very individuals who are fighting nato force
of the wars in afghanistan and pakistan. >> still not getting serious. >> i went away from fuzzy. >> is that like jerry at trick math? >> yes. >> are you surprised they don't have a deal today? i actually really -- i mean, i really thought -- >> i would be shocked if they don't have a deal in the next two or three days. again, republican freshmen may have a big ideology difference with barack obama and his world view, and the divide is no greater than ronald reagan's was with tip o'neal in 1983 when they sat down, and they did a kneel. yes, you differ with barack obama and the democrats, but -- >> usually you are good at seeing somebody's angle. like you know what their angle was. what is the angle here? i don't get it. >> these republicans believe this is their only opportunity -- >> are they so stuck to the contract with the tea party they cannot think outside the box for the good of the country? seriously? >> can i finish? you asked a question and i need to finish. they understand one thing. >> what do they understand? >> they are dead right about this. this is their best chan
savings based on savings on troop levels in iraq and afghanistan. >> well, interesting enough while they're calling the overseas contingency operation dollars phantom funds, anderson, you may know they used those funds and put them in their own budget that they've already voted for and relied on. >> so where do you see this going? what do you think happens tonight? what do you think happens tomorrow? >> well, of course, i don't know what's going to happen tonight. obviously the republicans are meeting with themselves to see whether or not they have the votes to pass what john boehner has offered as a purely partisan alternative. we were not involved in those discussions. we were not involved in the decisions. and it's interesting that even in their own party it is deeply factionalized, deeply divided paint, divided against their leadership, angry at their leadership, and a party that is divided itself has difficulty working with the president or working with us. and that's unfortunate. and the country is the poorer for it. and the image of america is poorer for it. and i would hope that
of that is what senator reid calls the winding down of the wars in iraq and afghanistan. that will save a trillion dollars. now republicans have called that a gimmick, a savings from wars that are winding down, even though, by the way, the same savings were counted in some republican budgets. reid's plan would not reform or cut medicare, medicaid, social security. also no changes to taxes. it would raise the debt ceiling by 2.4 trillion dollars. that would be enough to fund the government through next year's election. the boehner plan is considered more short term. it would raise the debt ceiling in two different steps. the first step would happen immediately raising the ceiling by a trillion dollars and spending cuts of 1.2 trillion over ten years. and get us to next year, right some we need a second vote to raise the debt ceiling again by another $1.6 trillion. that second increase would be contingent on more cuts. another $1.8 trillion in spending cuts and have to be agreed to by a bipartisan committee. >> so far, the debt stalemate has been a drag on the stock markets but not as bad as some of
in discretionary spending. also a lot of money from war money. he's saying as afghanistan and iraq wrap up, there's about a trillion dollars in savings. that's kind of controversial, brooke, because republicans don't count that money. but bottom line, $2.7 trillion all in savings cuts. you might like all them. that's what he's saying. he has a longer term committee in here but it would just make recommendations for long-term reform, really would have a vote on that but wouldn't force those reforms to happen. >> so i want to look at this plan here that you now have. i want to look at what supporters would say and also opponents. from everything i've been reading trying to keep up with all of this, the big difference here from the democrats' side there's no mention of revenue increases, correct? >> huge concession from democrats. the whole time democrats say there must be revenue on the table, republicans say they can't be. now democrats are dropping that huge demand. here is what supporters would say. this plan gets it done. they would say we're out of time. we're in the going to push for all of o
and afghanistan, and i think history will show that we were right to get into those. and we've had fairly good results so far from them though they've been very costly. >> i just always think it's important to tlook at history to then bring us to the president. as we come back here to 2011 and specifically your role, sir, in this. i know you're a staunch conservative. are you able to lead the way and compromise and the tea party are watching your every move, sir? >> well, it looks like this is going to be thrown over into gsh if it passes, it will be thrown over to the finance committee and we'll see what we can do to do this without raise taxes but also by doing appropriate cuts that really should happen. and by reforming some of these programs so that they work better, cost less. that will be less government. >> a lot of americans would agree with you, but are you willing to compromise given that you're up for re-election and you have tea party republicans looking closely at you. >> they have to be worked out but they have to be made on a basis that makes sense and not raise taxes. we're tax
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)